Saad is a good to very good player, no doubt, and he will be missed.
I very much like, however, bringing in a guy, or two or three who can help protect our smaller players.
And frankly, I know I have been seeing several years now sometimes as many as 5 opponents seemingly camped out in the 'Hawks crease. You do NOT win cups that way.
As good as some of the smaller players are, having guys like Seabs, Murphy, deHaan and now Zadrov are good complements to them.
Anyone know if Zadrov is skilled at blocking shots?

Especially since - after the Maatta trade and walking away from Crawford - they didn’t particularly need the additional cap space - we’re assuming Stan isn’t going to make a UFA splash - even in goal.

Maybe there is some kind of plan for that. I hope not.

The Saad deal saves Rocky $2.3MM cash. Right now, this looks like a cash savings deal to me.

Giving up a not-so-old skater (28 in two weeks) who could be very useful to the next Cup run - and with plenty of time for Stan to work out his next deal.

Seems like Stan decides early that he won’t be able to resign a pending UFA, gives up, and moves him out.
- StLBravesFan

Obviously they were not going to resign Saad, so they went out and got an asset, a tough to play against defenseman to protect their young goalies and young smaller Dmen. Not the expected return for Saad, but there must be reason to this madness. I don’t care how much money Rocky has, the business is not booming at this time(understatement), no beer and/or liquor sales, Rocky is getting ready for the 20/21 NHL financial challenges as well, that’s my $0.02...

Saad had 33 freaking points in 58 games, what kind of a return do u want? The Hawks got a 25 year old nasty bastard that is harder than hell to play against. That most importantly fills a need that the Hawks are sorely lacking. Plus, they opened up more cap space.
- ChicagoHope

Very good points I think we forget for as good as Saad was he was less then stellar finisher. The more I thought of the trade the more I'm on board with it. At 25 Zadorov will be a part of the future. Yes I wish they could have added a good prospect as well but obviously Sakic was not willing to do that.

Assuming that there are no more trades involving defense personnel (I hope there are), we are left with what I would term five "experienced" dmen (Keith, Murphy, DeHaan, Seabrook, and Zadorov) and potentially five "inexperienced" dmen (Boqvist, Mitchell, Carlsson, Beaudin, and Kalynuk). Let the five inexperienced guys battle in out in camp, and keep the top three, sending the fourth back to Rockford. Now we have eight defensemen, and I would make four pairings. For example:

Keith-Murphy
DeHaan-Mitchell
Zadorov-Boqvist
Carlsson-Seabrook

(In this example, Kalynuk and Beaudin go back to Rockford, but it could be anyone.

(These pairing may be way out in left field, but some pairings where each inexperienced dman is paired with an experienced dman.)

Three pairings suit up for each game, and one pairing sits. I would rotate the four pairings equally (every dman on the roster plays three of every four games). Would the players, especially the vets, like this? Probably not, but we are in rebuild mode, right? On each pairings "off game", the experienced dman coaches the inexperienced dman in techniques and strategies of the game as they watch together. It becomes somewhat of a mentoring program that the experienced dmen would have to buy in on. In my example, when the "all experienced" pairing of Keith-Murphy has their "off game", they are scouting all of the dmen, expecially the inexperienced dmen, to provide instruction to them. This also takes a little bit of wear and tear off of our older, injury prone guys, as well as our young guys who have not yet developed their bodies into fully "NHL ready" bodies.

Is this a stupid idea, or an idea that the coaches could not get buy in on? I readily admit I do not have a great degree of hockey knowledge, but it seems to me, if we are not consumed with doing everything we can to win every game, and are rather consumed with development of the "new wave" of players that will take us to the top again, it makes sense to me.

Obviously they were not going to resign Saad, so they went out and got an asset, a tough to play against defenseman to protect their young goalies and young smaller Dmen. Not the expected return for Saad, but there must be reason to this madness. I don’t care how much money Rocky has, the business is not booming at this time(understatement), no beer and/or liquor sales, Rocky is getting ready for the 20/21 NHL financial challenges as well, that’s my $0.02...
- Angotti

Why is it obvious that Saad wouldn’t be resigned?

Given the league’s financial situation - given that apparently no other team was willing to offer more than a third-pairing defenseman for him today, implying that the market for him whenever next season ends would be depressed - isn’t it very possible that a new deal could be had for 5x5, or 6x5 or (5 or 6) x 3 or something similar?

He’s not going to get more than his current deal gives him in this (or next summer’s) market.

I’d resign him for that.

Just my opinion of the market for him, of course. I could be wrong.

And if they are making these moves to save cash - let them say that Rocky wants to spend less by becoming a budget team for the next couple of years.

Why is it obvious that Saad wouldn’t be resigned? Stan gives up very easily on resigning free agents - maybe he should be better at negotiating.

Given the league’s financial situation - given that apparently no other team was willing to offer more than a third-pairing defenseman for him today, implying that the market for him whenever next season ends would be depressed - isn’t it very possible that a new deal could be had for 5x5, or 6x5 or (5 or 6) x 3 or something similar?

He’s not going to get more than his current deal gives him in this (or next summer’s) market.

I’d resign him for that.

Just my opinion of the market for him, of course. I could be wrong.

And if they are making these moves to save cash - let them say that Rocky wants to spend less by becoming a budget team for the next couple of years.
- StLBravesFan

This was my thought when I saw the move. Not necessarily that Boqvist would be McAvoy, but would free him up to do what he does.
- HawkintheD

In my humble opinion, Boqvist's offensive upside is much greater than Charlie's...

Seems to me its all about the money.

Heard an interview yesterday where the 'insider' said virtually every call initiated by a GM to another GM was an effort to dump $. Not very many teams in a position to take on payroll, Colorado was one of them.
- RickJ

The Hawks have money to spend. Even including Seabs, Smith and Shaw, and giving Strome 2.5, we have $5M available. We could easily take on a bad contract. MAF ($2M retained) ++ for Subban or Delia? Tyler Johnson (nothing retained) ++ for Reece Johnson. Take Hossa's contract back from AZ plus Hayton for next year's 2nd?
Ok I'll stop doing my Scott1977 impression now. 😆 🤣 😂

There is an opinion being expressed that the Saad and Maatta deals were more about saving Rocky actual dollars being paid out rather than any other reason. My opinion is that seems plausible, but so what? Rocky has proven in spades that he is not his father by spending to the max, and beyond. Given the current Covid induced economic reality, I'd be very surprised Rocky is the only owner doing likewise, especially those who own teams unlikely to win the Cup in 2021.

Even if that is true, there's more to the story. We all know it's been 5 years since the Hawks last won the Cup and 3 or 4 years since they were legitimate contenders. The strategy of trying to piecemeal a team around the old core hasn't worked and it was past time to move on and try something different. Whether or not this so-called "new direction" would have been undertaken without the economic downturn is mute because here we are.

Looking at this optimistically, reducing cash outlay and kick starting a new strategy would seem to work well together. When (if?) the economy gets back to normal, the Hawks should be closer to returning to contender status than they are right now.

The Hawks have money to spend. Even including Seabs, Smith and Shaw, and giving Strome 2.5, we have $5M available. We could easily take on a bad contract. MAF ($2M retained) ++ for Subban or Delia? Tyler Johnson (nothing retained) ++ for Reece Johnson. Take Hossa's contract back from AZ plus Hayton for next year's 2nd?
Ok I'll stop doing my Scott1977 impression now. 😆 🤣 😂
- tvetter

I’d be good with them not spending it. They have the last few years and that hasn’t exactly worked out.

Would rather they let some more of the kids play.

It looks like they’ll have Smith’s Cap Hit for this year only, along with an additional year of Shaw and deHaaan.

With the addition of Zadorov, I wouldn’t mind deHaan getting a new home if it frees some more Cap Space and allows someone like Carlsson to play.

Core reaction via Toews

https://theathletic.com/2...e-jonathan-toews-its-sad/

And, please, none of the "he's crying all the way to the bank / shouldn't have taken that much money..." BS that always accompanies these stories.
A) you would not have turned down that money when offered AND earned
B) These guys are human beings and that completely discounts that fact.

If you've never had a job where you were making lots of money, but were miserable, it may be hard to understand. Unfortunately, for them, they can't just change employers when that's the case, like you and I can. Choice is quit, a la Big Buff, or deal with a bad situation as best you can.

I was sorry to see Saad go. He was a favorite player of mine, both on the ice with his speed and 200' game and off the ice with his soft spoken almost sheepish personality. But he was overpaid and it was almost a certainty Stan wasn't going to let Saad's father hold him ransom in contract negotiation for the second time - so it's likewise a certainty that he wasn't going to re-sign with the Hawks. I'm pretty sure Stan would have had a conversation with Saad's representation and determined that he wasn't willing to sign a deal that made sense for the Hawks so it was a matter of trading him now versus trading him before the TDL and he got something he things can be a long term solution to a team need now when it was available.

I cannot count the number of times when additional whacks on our goalies who had frozen the puck (with no consequence) had me screaming at the TV this past season. Whereas our guys were getting mugged at the other end any time they got near the goalie blue zone. League rules actually encourage this type of behavior.

If our penalty kill and defensive play is to improve, we need more Zadorov types and less of the Maata ones. Especially if we keep drafting smallish skilled defencemen with our high picks.

Core reaction via Toews

https://theathletic.com/2...e-jonathan-toews-its-sad/

And, please, none of the "he's crying all the way to the bank / shouldn't have taken that much money..." BS that always accompanies these stories.
A) you would not have turned down that money when offered AND earned
B) These guys are human beings and that completely discounts that fact.

If you've never had a job where you were making lots of money, but were miserable, it may be hard to understand. Unfortunately, for them, they can't just change employers when that's the case, like you and I can. Choice is quit, a la Big Buff, or deal with a bad situation as best you can.
- pdx2ord

Come on. That’s crap. There’s making a lot of money and there’s making $10.5M a year lottery money.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say there isn’t anyone making that here...big stretch I know.

Yes, we all would have signed that deal in a nanosecond and yes he’s human and probably bummed about seeing his linemate go and the current situation.

Toews is easily one of my favorite players and he seems like a fairly thoughtful guy. I’d be more than a bit surprised if he hasn’t taken account of how things have gone since 2015 and figured at some point in time this could be a possible route the team takes.

So yes, crying all the way to the bank is more than an enviable position, and it may be hard for him to change addresses, but if he’s that unhappy, make it easier on the team to trade you if you want to go to a winner.

Saad had 33 freaking points in 58 games, what kind of a return do u want? The Hawks got a 25 year old nasty bastard that is harder than hell to play against. That most importantly fills a need that the Hawks are sorely lacking. Plus, they opened up more cap space.
- ChicagoHope

Fills one need, and further depleted another one. With the exception of cap space, it’s a zero sum transaction at best.

There is an opinion being expressed that the Saad and Maatta deals were more about saving Rocky actual dollars being paid out rather than any other reason. My opinion is that seems plausible, but so what? Rocky has proven in spades that he is not his father by spending to the max, and beyond. Given the current Covid induced economic reality, I'd be very surprised Rocky is the only owner doing likewise, especially those who own teams unlikely to win the Cup in 2021.

Even if that is true, there's more to the story. We all know it's been 5 years since the Hawks last won the Cup and 3 or 4 years since they were legitimate contenders. The strategy of trying to piecemeal a team around the old core hasn't worked and it was past time to move on and try something different. Whether or not this so-called "new direction" would have been undertaken without the economic downturn is mute because here we are.

Looking at this optimistically, reducing cash outlay and kick starting a new strategy would seem to work well together. When (if?) the economy gets back to normal, the Hawks should be closer to returning to contender status than they are right now.
- EbonyRaptor

The actual salary for next season is currently at $54M. I doubt Rocky would have a problem spending a little more, even in the pandemic era.

Fills one need, and further depleted another one. With the exception of cap space, it’s a zero sum transaction at best.
- Ogilthorpe2

I look at it this way. Defense was much weaker than the offense. So, even though we lost some on O, we gained a bigger need on the D side. So, it was a positive move.

That's the kicker for me in this trade. I don't mind Zadorov at all and actually like what he can bring on the blueline if slotted appropriately. However, if the goal was to gain more cap space, the Hawks only gained $1.8M on a $6M contract going out. Not a favorable ROI.

The other thing is that across both the Maatta and Saad trades, there was no gain in draft picks or prospects that project to be NHL players. The Hawks gained two prospects who are likely career minor leaguers in Morrison and Lindholm.

Shedding some salary is better than none yet the Saad trade at least has you feeling disappointed in the return.
- Theo Fox

Quite likely the market or just the two trade partners were adamant in refusing to part ways with a legitimate prospect since they were not acquiring top line, top pair dman.

Theo....if you were the other GM, would you definitely expect to get a trade done without sacrificing your best prospects?

Furthermore in the blink of an eye Colorado may need to trade a prospect in a salary dump if they first sign Hall or Pietrangelo. Hall should give Colorado major consideration. Playing for a good team where he should score lots of points and make a deep playoff run.

The one point each free agent needs to.understand, however, is that the team he signs with may only be able to keep a strong, deep roster together for one sesson. Later, one top player or a couple mid level players might become salary dumps. So free agents may want a no movement clause or a list of teams approved for trade

I too am disappointed but my immediate reaction was, we aren't trading high enough quality players which could bring an early draft choice or prospect. Even moving a draft choice in any round, in exchange for a draft choice in an earlier round is a plus/ a win win. But alas we did not even achieve that.

Just do not loose focus about this trade.

The price is lower and quantity more available for 200 foot players who possess grit or play the cycle/battle along boards even should they be our own AHL guys or acquired from the trade market/ free agents.

Zadorov is more a third pair than second pair. But a young healthy mean third pair - a legitimate one, not going to suck badly and he has experience- does not come along often in Bowman's deals.

Be happy we replace a slot filler in Special K & Maata with a more appropriate need. Saad will get replaced even if it is a lesser light. We need Zadorov more

If you do not agree that is your prerogative. I am not into trying to persuade anyone whom disagrees with this blog entry. Although I respect your opinion greatly, Theo, if you disagree with my assessment then please explain why. I am not (I repeat) not into going back and forth on this. Just interested your view if you disagree.

Fills one need, and further depleted another one. With the exception of cap space, it’s a zero sum transaction at best.
- Ogilthorpe2

It isn’t, IMO.

Replaces a top 6 at best - middle 6 at worst - skater with a probable 3rd pairing defenseman.

I cannot count the number of times when additional whacks on our goalies who had frozen the puck (with no consequence) had me screaming at the TV this past season. Whereas our guys were getting mugged at the other end any time they got near the goalie blue zone. League rules actually encourage this type of behavior.

If our penalty kill and defensive play is to improve, we need more Zadorov types and less of the Maata ones. Especially if we keep drafting smallish skilled defencemen with our high picks.
- 67hawks

And Saad was one of the best PK forwards. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
If Zadorov was the target, should’ve sent a worthless POS like Nylander the other way.

Obviously they were not going to resign Saad, so they went out and got an asset, a tough to play against defenseman to protect their young goalies and young smaller Dmen. Not the expected return for Saad, but there must be reason to this madness. I don’t care how much money Rocky has, the business is not booming at this time(understatement), no beer and/or liquor sales, Rocky is getting ready for the 20/21 NHL financial challenges as well, that’s my $0.02...
- Angotti

But regular beer/liquor sales are doing just fine, as is the Wirtz empire............

I look at it this way. Defense was much weaker than the offense. So, even though we lost some on O, we gained a bigger need on the D side. So, it was a positive move.
- powerenforcer

I would expect you to approve, you love meatheads. The top 6 forward group is every bit lacking size and physicality as the D. It’s a zero move.

Core reaction via Toews

https://theathletic.com/2...e-jonathan-toews-its-sad/

And, please, none of the "he's crying all the way to the bank / shouldn't have taken that much money..." BS that always accompanies these stories.
A) you would not have turned down that money when offered AND earned
B) These guys are human beings and that completely discounts that fact.

If you've never had a job where you were making lots of money, but were miserable, it may be hard to understand. Unfortunately, for them, they can't just change employers when that's the case, like you and I can. Choice is quit, a la Big Buff, or deal with a bad situation as best you can.
- pdx2ord

I'm on board with a rebuild but not like this.

These 4 core deserve more respect. And they deserve to know the plan.

Never thought I'd say this but "Where's John McDonough when you need him?"

He was a hard-ass and pretty old school but he had the utmost respect for his players and the franchise he ran.

In my humble opinion, Boqvist's offensive upside is much greater than Charlie's...
- wiz1901

I never understood the talk of McAvoy being the greatest Dman to come along in a decade.

Also, understand Boqvist was trying to focus on Defense, but he needs to move to what he does best. He's a puck moving, offensive defenseman.

Last year, he never once, to me anyway, looked like the guy I saw play for Sweden and London.

Maybe having a big stay at home dman with him will let him move to what he does best. Keith is not a great partner for him, but assume they thought playing with him would be the best for his development.

So here's the end result.

A 3rd pair Maatta was exchanged for a more physical 3rd pair Zadorov at the same cap hit. 3.2M for Z plus the 750K retained on Maatta about equals Maatta's 4M cap hit.

So Saad with 1M retained was traded for no assets, just the 5M in cap savings. Hmmm.

It's no secret that I have been in the trade Saad camp, but I would have expected something more back.

Maybe Colorado is treating Saad as a rental and thought Zadorov was the proper return. If Avs extend him after the season, Stan should have negotiated a high pick or future considerations (maybe a high prospect from a list submitted by the Avs) if that happened.

Saad's 10 team trade list probably just kicked in so maybe Stan's hands were tied a bit in finding a trade partner. But that begets the question why a trade wasn't done sooner.

I can't believe this rebuild and save some money plan was developed in the past week. What was the front office doing since the hiatus and after the Hawks were eliminated from the playoffs? Trades were made during the playoffs as teams got eliminated. They had over a month to work out a better trade with more available trade partners.

As others have noted this isn't the way to conduct a rebuild. Looks more like saving $$$ instead.